hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 584 0 Browse Search
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Massachusetts in the Army and Navy during the war of 1861-1865, vol. 2 298 0 Browse Search
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I. 112 0 Browse Search
Benjamnin F. Butler, Butler's Book: Autobiography and Personal Reminiscences of Major-General Benjamin Butler 76 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events, Diary from December 17, 1860 - April 30, 1864 (ed. Frank Moore) 72 0 Browse Search
William Schouler, A history of Massachusetts in the Civil War: Volume 1 62 0 Browse Search
Oliver Otis Howard, Autobiography of Oliver Otis Howard, major general , United States army : volume 1 62 0 Browse Search
George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. 2, 17th edition. 52 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery. 50 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 1. (ed. Frank Moore) 46 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I.. You can also browse the collection for Maine (Maine, United States) or search for Maine (Maine, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 56 results in 15 document sections:

1 2
bers from Delaware--to 76 Nays, whereof ten were from Free States--Massachusetts (then including Maine) supplying three of them, New York three, with one each from New Jersey, New Hampshire, Ohio, and daily, until the 19th of February, when a bill came down from the Senate to admit the State of Maine into the Union, with a rider, authorizing the people of Missouri to form a State Constitution, e force the Missouri measure through the House upon the strength of the other proposition. The Maine bill had passed the House weeks before, without serious opposition. Reaching the Senate, it wasch 2, 1820. from said Committee, that the Senate should give up its combination of Missouri with Maine; that the House should abandon its attempt to restrict Slavery in Missouri; and that both Houses voted against the Compromise. So the bill passed both Houses, as did that for the admission of Maine on the same day. This virtually ended the Missouri struggle; Some idea of the state of fee
but who readily embraced his views. He visited successively most of the clergymen of Boston, and induced eight of them, belonging to various sects, to meet him. All of them, on explanation, approved his labors, and subscribed for his periodical; and, in the course of a few days, they aided him to hold an anti-Slavery meeting, which was largely attended. At the close of his remarks, several clergymen expressed a general concurrence in his views. He extended his journey to New Hampshire and Maine, lecturing where he could, and obtaining some encouragement. He spoke also in the principal towns of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut; and, on his homeward route, traversed the State of New York, speaking at Poughkeepsie, Albany, Lundy's brief journal of this tour has been preserved; and, next to an entry running--On the 25th I arrived at Northampton, Mass., after 9 o'clock in the evening, and called at three taverns before I could get lodgings or polite treatment --we find t
nd partly Scotch, all of the industrious middle class, had been citizens of New Hampshire and of Maine for several generations. He was distinguished, from early youth, alike for diligence in labor ahampions of Slavery, under the lead of Mr. Calhoun. On the presentation, by Mr. Fairfield, of Maine (December 16, 1835), of the petition of one hundred and seventy-two women, praying the Abolitionlavery in the District of Columbia, and also the resolutions offered by an honorable member from Maine (Mr. Jarvis), with the amendment thereto, proposed by an honorable member from Virginia (Mr. Wisinckney of South Carolina; Hamer of Ohio; Pierce of New Hampshire; Hardin of Kentucky; Jarvis of Maine; Owens of Georgia; Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania; Dromgoole of Virginia; and Turrill of New York — l (all Democrats but Proffit, a Tylerized Whig), who voted for this resolve, were as follows: Maine.--Virgil D. Parris, Albert Smith.--New Hampshire.--Charles G. Atherton, Edmund Burke, Ira A. Eas
, Mr. Clay received the electoral votes of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee--105 in all, being those of eleven States; while Mr. Polk was supported by Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, and Arkansas--fifteen States, casting 170 electoral votes. The popular votes throughout the countrith equal spirit and energy; but the disparity of forces in either case was, to the intelligent, impartial observer, quite obvious. In the contest of 1844, on the contrary, the battle raged with uniform fury from extreme North to furthest South--Maine and New Hampshire voting strongly for Polk, while Tennessee (his own State) went against him by a small majority, and Louisiana was carried against Clay only by fraud, and by a majority of less than seven hundred in nearly twenty-seven thousand v
the extreme limit of justifiable or tolerable concession to Slavery had already been reached; wherein Messrs. Hamlin, of Maine, George Rathbun, Martin Grover and Preston King, of New York, David Wilmot, of Pennsylvania, Jacob Brinckerhoff and Jamesthe last session to lay the Wilmot Proviso on the table, and who now voted for the principle as above, were as follow: Maine.--Asa W. H. Clapp, James S. Wiley--2. New York.--Frederick W. Lord--1. Ohio.-Thomas Richey--1. Indiana.-Charles W. Cathcrt, Thomas J. Henley, John L. Robinson, William W. Wick--4. Illinois.--Robert Smith--1. Messrs. Clark and H. Williams, of Maine, Birdsall and Maclay, of New York, Brodhead and Mann, of Pennsylvania; Pettit, of Indiana; Ficklin and McClernand, of Ill York; and Fitzgerald, of Michigan, from Free States--to 21 Nays, including Messrs. Webster, of Massachusetts, Hamlin, of Maine, Dix, of New York, and Breese, of Illinois. The bill, thus amended, passed the Senate by 33 Yeas to 22 Nays. But the
esentatives, may, if they see fit, prohibit the existence of Slavery therein. This touchstone of the true nature and intent of the measure was most decisively voted down; the Yeas and Nays being as follows: Yeas — Fessenden and Hamlin, of Maine; Sumner, of Massachusetts; Foot, of Vermont; Smith, of Connecticut; Fish and Seward, of New York; Chase and Wade, of Ohio; Dodge (Henry), of Wisconsin--10. Nays — Norris and Williams, of New Hampshire; Toucey, of Connecticut; Brodhead, of Pennt is both the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism — Polygamy and Slavery. An American National Convention was held at Philadelphia on the 22d of February; all the States represented but Maine, Vermont, Georgia, and South Carolina. An American National Council (secret) had met three days before in the same place, and adopted a platform. The following plank is the most essential: The recognition of the right of native-born and nat<
tion. Total 35. The Nays were--Messrs. Fessenden and Hamlin, of Maine, Clark and Hale, of New Hampshire, Sumner and Wilson, of Massachulsion; which was defeated — Yeas 105; Nays 198--as follows: Yeas--Maine, 3; Massachusetts, 8; Connecticut, 2 1/2; New Jersey, 5; Pennsylvannessee, 11; Kentucky, 9; Minnesota, 1 1/2; Oregon, 3--105. Nays--Maine, 5; New Hampshire, 5; Vermont, 5 ; Massachusetts, 5; Rhode Island, by Mr. Samuels; which was adopted, by the following vote: Yeas--Maine, 8; New Hampshire, 5; Vermont, 5; Massachusetts, 7; :Rhode Island, to Lincoln, giving the latter a clear majority. Mr. McCrillis, of Maine, followed, changing ten votes from Seward to Lincoln; Mr. Andrew, oon proceeded to ballot for Vice-President, when Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine, received, on the first ballot, 194 votes; Cassius M. Clay, of Kentin. But, after the disruption there, things were bravely altered. Maine, early in September, elected a Republican Governor by 18,091 majori
dge had 72; Bell 39 (from Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee); and Douglas barely 12--those of Missouri (9) and 3, as aforesaid, from New Jersey. But, though nowhere in the Electoral, Mr. Douglas was second in the Popular, vote, as will be seen by the following table, wherein the Fusion vote is divided between the parties which contributed to it, according to the best estimate that can now be made of their strength respectively: Free states. States. Lincoln. Douglas. Breckinridge. Bell. Maine 62,811 26,693 6,368 2,046 New Hampshire 37,519 25,881 2,112 441 Massachusetts 106,353 34,372 5,939 22,331 Rhode Island 12,244 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.4,000 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.1,000 2,707 Connecticut 43,972 15,522 14,641 3,291 Vermont 33,808 6,849 218 1,969 New York 353,804 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated stre
he North had no desire to enforce upon the South the maintenance of an abhorred, detested Union. Accordingly — the second day after Mr. Lincoln's election had been assured at the polls — the following leading article appeared November 9, 1860. in The New York Tribune: going to go.--The people of the United States have indicated, according to the forms prescribed by the Constitution, their desire that Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, shill be their next President, and Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine, their Vice-President. A very large plurality of the popular vote has been cast for them, and a decided majority of Electors chosen, who will undoubtedly vote for and elect them on the first Wednesday in December next. The electoral votes will be formally sealed up and forwarded to Washington, there to be opened and counted, on a given day in February next, in the presence of both Houses of Congress; and it will then be the duty of Mr. John C. Breckinridge, as President of the Senate, to d
stronger governments to enlarge their powers and jurisdiction at the expense of weaker, and of majorities to usurp and abuse power, and oppress minorities ; also affirming that sectional divisions can no longer be suppressed, etc., etc., proposed February 7, 1861. that Congress should recommend to the States a radical change of the Federal Constitution, by adding thereto as follows: article XIII: Sec. 1. The United States are divided into four sections, as follows: The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island. Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania ; and all new States annexed and admitted into the Union or formed or erected within the jurisdiction of said States, or by the junction of two or more of the same or of parts thereof, or out of territory acquired north of said States, shall constitute one section, to be known as the North. The States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas, and a
1 2